View Single Post
Old 03-22-2011, 11:12 AM   #252 (permalink)
t vago
MPGuino Supporter
 
t vago's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 1,766

The Karen-Mobile - '05 Dodge Magnum SXT
Team Dodge
90 day: 26.72 mpg (US)

Fiat Dakota - '00 Dodge Dakota SLT RWD Quad Cab
90 day: 16.67 mpg (US)

The Red Sled - '01 Dodge Durango SLT 4WD
90 day: 16.96 mpg (US)
Thanks: 799
Thanked 682 Times in 437 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard View Post
Piston/crankshaft engines can only be improved a little more than they already are. This wave/turbine is nearly an order of magnitude better; and if it can be produced, then it should be pursued.
You do realize that the "22.7%" in my signature represents a fuel economy improvement, right? Even when I do city-only driving in my truck, I still get around 7% better fuel economy over what this 4400+ lb beast I drive is rated for.

Almost all of that is due to engine improvements, and those engine improvements I have done are of the garden-variety nature. I do not get the luxury of practicing hypermiling techniques due to the nature of the traffic I encounter in my commute. My version 2 aerocap hasn't even been fabricated yet, so there's no contribution there.

Clearly, if I can squeeze a 22% fuel economy improvement out of a 4.7L V8 engine using commonly found techniques, there's still more that can be squeezed out of the existing internal combustion engine.

The allure of that is, new readers looking for improvements to their own engines won't be sidetracked by wave motion engines out of Star Blazers, or thermodynamically dubious contraptions that have been developed for 10+ years and have yet to be introduced into the mass market.
__________________
The Fiat Dakota


The Karen-mobile


The Red Sled
  Reply With Quote